Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2014-03-11

[Patrick Lauer]

On Friday 28 February 2014 10:34:32 Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> On 02/28/2014 06:15 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> > On 02/27/2014 09:08 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> >> Hi everyone,
> >>
> >> I'm putting the call out there for any agenda items for the next Council
> >> meeting, which will be held on March 11, 2014 at 1900 UTC.  This is
> >> short notice but we got off track because of FOSDEM and we're going to
> >> try to get back on track.
> >>
> >> So far, the only item is final ratification of glep 63 [1].
> >
> > Since it's still a bit cold I'd like to start a nice fire to warm us up:
> >
> > I'd like QA and Council to figure out how much we care about FHS.
> >
> > My main complaint is some projects (including e.g. systemd and
> > apparently now also udev) storing config files in /lib and/or /usr/lib.
> >
> >  From FHS' point of view this is totally wrong, config files go to /etc
> >
> > Only libraries should be in /lib.
> > Moving things to /usr/lib adds the extra fun that /usr needs to be
> > mounted to acces *config files*. This is bad for our collective blood
> > pressure.
> >
> > So I'd like to see config files stored in /etc again. Where they can be
> > properly tracked and versioned ...
> >
> > (iow, storing config files in any other location than /etc is wrong;
> > storing example configs in e.g. /usr/share is fine too; storing config
> > in any other place is a valid bug that needs to be fixed)
> >
> > For upstreams that insist on splitting configs in "system default" and
> > "local override" (which is rather nonsensical, but let them have some
> > fun) I would suggest a subfolder of /etc, maybe /etc/defaults or
> > /etc/systemdefaults or maybe /etc/lib/etc/usr/static if that's what
> > makes people happy
> >
> >
> > Enjoy the exothermic oxidation,
> >
> > Patrick
>
> Speaking as a council member and the next chair: Patrick, how would you
> pose this as a motion?  As stated, the council should "discuss FHS" but
> how would you word this as a policy that we can rule on?  I have an idea
> but would like to hear what you want.

I don't think we should aim at strict FHS adherence - as far as I remember the 
last time people looked at it we figured out that e.g. slotted KDE would be 
"invalid". So strict adherence was never considered sane anyway.

Restricting the discussion to "Config files go to /etc with examples in 
/usr/share" might work - I'm not offended by kernel modules or python libraries 
in /lib, but putting *config* there is just ....aaaaugh 

(And putting boot-relevant config files in /usr, that is just hilarious - now 
you MUST HAVE an initrd so that you can even have a chance at booting, because 
your config files are not visible in the rootfs. The lesson why /etc appears to 
have been lost)

>
> Speaking as a gentoo dev: This is one of my objections with systemd and
> the whole / + /usr merge.  It violates a standard which is assumed in
> many setups, namely FHS.  Another is that systemd violates the "one
> thing well" principle.

I disagree with the rather random nature of the change, so now basically /usr 
is the new / (why not move everything to / and save 4 characters on each path 
name?) and you need an initrd to boot (which has to replicate all of the 
rootfs just to have a chance to mount /usr)

Y'know, maybe I've turned into a conservative greybeard, but moving rootfs 
into an initrd just doesn't add up :)